Check out Black and White Photography section of our forum.
LEICA vs Canon/Nikon
May 10, 2013 16:10:04 #
Sidphotog wrote:
Hey Friends, br br We all are aware of this unend... (show quote)
Although I'm not an expert on cameras, I doubt that the casual, or even the serious, user would be able to see a difference in quality between pictures taken with a good quality Nikon, Canon, Sony, or Leica. A great deal depends upon who is taking a picture of what.
When I see someone walking around with a Leica, old or new, I figure he is in a healthy financial situation, and he doesn't mind showing the world that he can afford a Leica. I doubt that he could take better pics with his Leica than I could with my Nikon.
The thing to do is read reviews of the Leica or comparisons between Leica and other brands. It would be hard for me to justify the cost of a Leica. Whatever model camera you use for comparison, the Leica will cost considerably more. High price doesn't always equate with high quality.
May 10, 2013 16:15:49 #
May 10, 2013 16:18:17 #
Billybird wrote:
Finding good black and white film could be a problem.
The Leica Monochrom is an $8,000 digital camera that takes B&W pictures.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/860536-REG/Leica_10760_M_Monochrom_Black_and.html
Check out Close Up Photography section of our forum.
May 10, 2013 16:55:51 #
Billybird wrote:
Finding good black and white film could be a problem.
It is easy.
May 10, 2013 17:25:51 #
After 60 years in the photographic business and owning a Leica, Rolleiflex, Hasselblad and Canon prestige cameras, I am amazed at the quality prints I get from a 10mp Nikon D80, Photoshop and a Canon Pro 9000 printer. I don't miss the stains from Dektol or the acrid odor of fixer one bit.
If you have the big bucks and want a Leica or Hasselblad, by all means get one or two.
Funny thing, when I look at quality pictures I never wonder what kind of equipment produced them.
The photographer's eye is all that matters.
If you have the big bucks and want a Leica or Hasselblad, by all means get one or two.
Funny thing, when I look at quality pictures I never wonder what kind of equipment produced them.
The photographer's eye is all that matters.
May 10, 2013 17:32:00 #
May 10, 2013 18:01:12 #
In what sense are they Leica lenses on Panasonic cameras?
Aren't they made in Japan or China? Did Leica design them? Or just the labels?
Leica lenses are designed in Germany, made in Germany, (or Canada). I did hear the current Summarit lenses, Leica's cheap (!) label are made by Cosina but it might be untrue.
Philip
Aren't they made in Japan or China? Did Leica design them? Or just the labels?
Leica lenses are designed in Germany, made in Germany, (or Canada). I did hear the current Summarit lenses, Leica's cheap (!) label are made by Cosina but it might be untrue.
Philip
Check out Smartphone Photography section of our forum.
May 10, 2013 18:11:38 #
plewislambert wrote:
In what sense are they Leica lenses on Panasonic cameras?
Aren't they made in Japan or China? Did Leica design them? Or just the labels?
Leica lenses are designed in Germany, made in Germany, (or Canada). I did hear the current Summarit lenses, Leica's cheap (!) label are made by Cosina but it might be untrue.
Philip
Aren't they made in Japan or China? Did Leica design them? Or just the labels?
Leica lenses are designed in Germany, made in Germany, (or Canada). I did hear the current Summarit lenses, Leica's cheap (!) label are made by Cosina but it might be untrue.
Philip
The way I understand it, the lenses are made under license from Leica. Leica approves the design and the manufacturing process.
May 10, 2013 18:27:39 #
dragonfist wrote:
My thoughts are this. If you can afford the Leica without breaking the budget and you really want it then go for it. You are as far as anyone knows only coming up this road once. If the golden ring is within your reach grab it. Don't settle for something less only to regret it later on.
I agree with this. But here are a couple of my thoughts. The advantage to Leica lenses are in the wide angles. If not shooting wide angles, then Sony/Zeiss has the edge IMHO. All digital sensors seem to have a problem with light coming in at acute angles ( as with true wide angle prime leica type lenses ). So, it would seem, if you are really serious about quality images in wide angle that you are proabably better served shooting film. And, if you are going to the "trouble and expense" of shooting film, you might as well go to medium format. Ken Rockwell calls the Mamiya 6 and 7 the best image makers on the planet and I agree - but would also include the Fuji 645 series using scanned Velvia or similar.
May 10, 2013 20:09:23 #
No doubt the Leica is a very capable camera. I do black & white photography now and then, but when shooting digital, I still shoot in color, then process the images to b&w later on in an editor. I feel I have much greater control over the tones using software than I would with an arsenal of different color filters during the shoot. Should I really thirst for the challenge of shooting directly to b&w, I use my film camera and b&w film.
May 10, 2013 20:40:54 #
winterrose wrote:
It's sort of funny, when I think of it. When I add... (show quote)
Excellent comment!
Check out The Pampered Pets Corner section of our forum.
May 10, 2013 21:05:11 #
May 10, 2013 21:50:58 #
My printer prints 13 X 19 maximum. Prints are extremely sharp. Never have a need for anything bigger. If I did I would probably get a camera in the 16 to 20 mpxs range.
May 11, 2013 02:34:51 #
Leicaflex seems to know about Leica cameras, I do not. I looked on BH Photo store and saw a lot of expensive Leica lenses that were all manual focus. I used to trust my eyes before I got glasses but now looking through a view finder with my driving glasses produces ok results but with my reading glasses it doesn't work. I know there is an adjustment on the viewfinder (but haven't tried it for reading glasses) but since the eyeglasses can see a focused image out of focus, how can you be sure you are making the correct adjustment?
Leicaflex wrote:
The quality of Canon (L series lenses) and Nikon a... (show quote)
May 11, 2013 03:21:03 #
"if you are really serious about quality images in wide angle that you are probably better served shooting film. And, if you are going to the "trouble and expense" of shooting film, you might as well go to medium format. "
Medium format would cost you four times as much as 35mm and the outfits are often very heavy (but the results are better than 35mm for big enlargements). I stopped using my 8 on 120 Plaubel monorail, excellent though it is, because of these two considerations.
As to the drawbacks of ultrawide lenses like Voigtlander 15mm and 21mm, whose back glass is very close to the sensor, I am experimenting with 17mm Tokina and Tamron lenses on adapters on an M9. The results are quite promising. These are film camera lenses whose back glass is some 43mm away from the film plane to clear the reflex mirrors on slrs so there is none of the edge vignetting that I had with the Voigtlanders.
Philip
Medium format would cost you four times as much as 35mm and the outfits are often very heavy (but the results are better than 35mm for big enlargements). I stopped using my 8 on 120 Plaubel monorail, excellent though it is, because of these two considerations.
As to the drawbacks of ultrawide lenses like Voigtlander 15mm and 21mm, whose back glass is very close to the sensor, I am experimenting with 17mm Tokina and Tamron lenses on adapters on an M9. The results are quite promising. These are film camera lenses whose back glass is some 43mm away from the film plane to clear the reflex mirrors on slrs so there is none of the edge vignetting that I had with the Voigtlanders.
Philip
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Black and White Photography section of our forum.